3 ms·
1. "People" are neither a monolith nor convenient straw men to be blown down 2. The arguments that he "doesn't run his companies" is referencing the successes,
by vanderZwan 4y ago
1. "People" are neither a monolith nor convenient straw men to be blown down
2. The arguments that he "doesn't run his companies" is referencing the successes, and that he "runs a company into the ground" references failures. These two ways of looking at him are not only not mutually exclusive, they go very well together: "whenever he intervenes he makes it worse, any company that is successful is so because he gets out of the way", or something along those lines.
Whether or not those arguments hold up I neither know nor care about, because this drama is as significant to my life as Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp was. Which is to say: only insofar as it seems to be so goddamn unavoidable when I want to spend my limited time on this earth doing other things.
- systemvoltage 4y agoYou didn't finish your argument. It could also be not just "whenever he intervenes he makes it worse, any company that is successful is so because he gets out of the way" — but also "whenever he intervenes he makes things better, any company that is a failure is so because he got of the way". That too is not mutually exclusive.